Zoo "Confessions"

[CMP]

I generally agree that we should adhere to the posted rules when visiting zoological institutions, and animals should be respected by avoiding the use of flash. Even if flash doesn't harm them physically, it can be disruptive for them. When I want to take a photo, I make the best of the available conditions. If I want a photo, I try my best with what I have, and if that isn't enough, well, such is life. I'll try to look a little longer and savor the moment.

I've even engaged in polite conversation to convince fellow visitors not to use flash, like when observing the Pangolin at Brookfield. I didn't want the wonderful creature, actively feeding out and about, to experience any discomfort.

However, there are sentiments that I somewhat agree with in principle. Attitudes like 'rules for thee but not for me' irk me. Some rule-makers themselves break the rules. Limited access areas (Thinking about university associated closed-off habitat in my town in particular, but this also goes for zoos) are built out of mistrust, assuming that others can't be trusted to follow them. While I believe I can act responsibly, I must accept such rules because there's no evidence to prove my capability of being trustworthy, I haven't distinguished myself as such.

Closure from the general public, who will unfortunately inevitably litter or disrupt, is understandable, even if I dislike it, and think I am more responsible. I begrudgingly acknowledge that I should apply, ask ahead, or otherwise place myself on the side of being trustworthy to gain access to permitted but risky activities. (Although, seriously, that pond near my house would not be disrupted in the slightest if I took the path for birding - it isn't an area of 'ecological significance' and it is right next to a busy road for goodness' sake!)

I have broken rules before at zoological institutions, specifically the blanket 'no photography' rule at the deepwater reef section of the Steinhart Aquarium. I would break this rule again because there seems to be no sensible reason for it other than strongly preventing flash photography. I always have my flash turned off, as I dislike the artificial look it creates. I understand the potential issues if everyone believed rules were optional and up to their own interpretation, it's worth noting that people are the rule-makers, people are flawed, so rules can be flawed. Can I really be faulted for breaking this rule? I suppose that is my 'Zoo confession'.

 

[JVM]

I kind of wish Pepper Family Wildlife Center rehabilitated at least one of the old indoor big cat houses for some smaller species. The new exhibit is a vastly superior home for lions but the indoor viewing area offers next to nothing if the lions aren't present.

 

[Yoshistar888]

- I’ve never seen a Capybara or a Leopard Gecko.

- I really enjoy watching Meerkats and Asian Small Clawed Otters

- I spend more time in the reptile house than anywhere else!

- it took me several years to find a wild Tawny Frogmouth

 

[Mossman Joe]

Not sure if this counts as something worth confessing, but within the 4 months after my local zoo's revitalization (the Solo Safari), I have visited the zoo 5 times, once by myself and 4 other times with differing company.

This is because I have multiple friend groups, and a bunch of free time at the time

 

[dillotest0]

In regards to flash/flash photography

From what I understand flash is often used in the case of wild nocturnal animals. I am not educated very much as to what effect this has physically on the animals, so I will refrain from commenting on that.
However I will concede - flash does not operate in zoos as it would in the wild. The typical nocturnal house has animals behind a layer of glass - so much light becomes concentrated into a specific point. I would imagine that this has a disconcerting effect.
However, as the original poster did not actually mention flash photography, I will assume that they didn't take photographs of the animal in question. I have not been to the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, but from what I can see online it is rather brighter than many nocturne houses I have been to. It appears to allow good views of the animals with adequate light, so I will concede that exposing the sensitive animals to even more light seems unnecessary.
Speaking of photography however I can see that it's a different story. The camera I take with myself to the zoo is the Nikon D200 - an older build which doesn't do too well in low light. And the main lens that I have with me that I took to these zoos was a 300 mm lens with an aperture of f5 if I recall correctly. And sometimes I took photographs in nocturne settings; but did not use flash even so.
And I will admit that many photographs that came out were less than ideal.

This photograph of a slender loris was taken at Beale Park - the blue highlights already present in the animal's enclosure. The compromise I had was to take photos with low shutter speed and high ISO - which let in much light - but made for difficult focus.

I think the above is the best photograph I could achieve.

Some cases however are salvageable. This Egyptian Fruit Bat at Cotswolds I think was in a decently dark enclosure [obviously]. But even so with the appropriate settings and post-processing I managed to make the bat visible.
And so I think part of it goes down to what one expects out of a nocturne house. I would not expect to get a feasible photograph of a fruit bat in flight in such conditions - as a proper flight photo requires a high shutter-speed - which is non-condusive to the routine I have found works.
But that is to say, a lens with an arpeture as discussed won't do wonders in low light. But as for f2.8 - of which I have two such lenses right now? Would a 300 mm lens of f2.8 aperture do any better in a nocturne house?
That's a good question which I lack an answer to.
And that is to say that DSLRs have of course come a long way since 2005 - with such ISOs that make almost for feasible nocturnal house photography.
Though looking at the user's account, my impression is that they are not using a 'professional' camera. Though I could be wrong. And if you're not quite as stringent about photographic details as I tend to be... I'm sure that there are plenty of phone-cameras and such that do better in low light than do DSLRs.
So there's not really much of an excuse for flash photography in such exhibits in my experience.
Though I will say the case @Sicarius described in regards to the deep sea fish aquarium is interesting.

 

[aardvark250]

I really enjoy watching Meerkats and Asian Small Clawed Otters

Oh that's not a confession. I like watching those 2 species in action as well. As I always said, those are really good zoo species with their playful and active behaviour. We just dont enjoy every zoo having those two when there can be other equally as interesting replacements.

 

[Iguana_Cabana]

Here’s my confession: I actually really like Franklin Park Zoo’s indoor gorilla habitat. Obviously, it’s not the most naturalistic gorilla exhibit, but it still appears to accommodate the gorillas very well. I also like how it has multiple other viewing windows as you walk through the Tropical Forest building to show you that the gorillas still have a good amount of space. I also confess that I haven’t seen Franklin Park’s new outdoor gorilla exhibit yet.

 

[Astrotom3000]

I spent 12 straight hours in the Georgia Aquarium. Didn't see the sun for an entire day.

I collect souvenir cups at every zoo I go to; I have amassed quite a collection and use them frequently (currently enjoying some water from my VA Zoo cup). Same with magnets.

I have never seen an Asian Elephant since I went to the Bronx Zoo as a kid (and that was in the 90s). Every zoo I have been to that has elephants has African Elephants.

I spend all day at facilities that most zoochatters say take 2-4 hours. Very rarely is this not the case (Greenville, Gatorland, etc.).

 

[birdsandbats]

I spent 12 straight hours in the Georgia Aquarium. Didn't see the sun for an entire day.

I collect souvenir cups at every zoo I go to; I have amassed quite a collection and use them frequently (currently enjoying some water from my VA Zoo cup). Same with magnets.

I have never seen an Asian Elephant since I went to the Bronx Zoo as a kid (and that was in the 90s). Every zoo I have been to that has elephants has African Elephants.

I spend all day at facilities that most zoochatters say take 2-4 hours. Very rarely is this not the case (Greenville, Gatorland, etc.).

I'm very curious to know how long you would spend at Shedd Aquarium. Most ZooChatters say it's a 3 hour zoo but I've never seen it in less than 6 hours.

 

[JVM]

I spend all day at facilities that most zoochatters say take 2-4 hours. Very rarely is this not the case (Greenville, Gatorland, etc.).

This is definitely me. I will often spend additional time by certain animals if they are active and sometimes use extra time to go back through an exhibit. Lincoln Park Zoo can be done in only three hours or less, but most times I head up there I take an extra hour or two anyway. I sometimes pass back through the Primate House or Small Mammal-Reptile House two or three times.

I definitely get why someone heavily booked on a trip may rush through a zoo, and I've done the same when necessary, but I really like the option to maximize my time when I can.

 

[CMP]

I'm very curious to know how long you would spend at Shedd Aquarium. Most ZooChatters say it's a 3 hour zoo but I've never seen it in less than 6 hours.

I suppose I have a confession to make then. A little under 5 1/2 hours at Wildlife World Zoo, Aquarium, and Safari Park last month is the longest I've ever been able to be at a zoo. The longest I've been at Shedd was about 3 hours 45 minutes, with most times being much closer to 2 hours.

Yeah, many of my visits to larger zoos are a bit rushed, but I still generally enjoy them and am able to make full species lists and get photos of almost all the animals (Many will be poor though). I'd definitely love to stay longer if I could, and linger at different exhibits to watch the antics of one species or the other.

I wish I could stay longer at zoos, but due to travel with friends, family, transport times, or other obligations soon after, I never can manage longer. Someday I need to take either a solo trip or one with those who tolerate opening to close at a zoo.

 

[Fallax]

I have never seen an Asian Elephant since I went to the Bronx Zoo as a kid (and that was in the 90s). Every zoo I have been to that has elephants has African Elephants.

When I visited Tierpark Berlin in 2018 it was the first time I had seen an African elephant since I was a kid, everywhere else I have been has Asians! The two species are roughly equal in the UK as well so I guess it's just weird chance.

 

[birdsandbats]

I suppose I have a confession to make then. A little under 5 1/2 hours at Wildlife World Zoo, Aquarium, and Safari Park last month is the longest I've ever been able to be at a zoo. The longest I've been at Shedd was about 3 hours 45 minutes, with most times being much closer to 2 hours.

Yeah, many of my visits to larger zoos are a bit rushed, but I still generally enjoy them and am able to make full species lists and get photos of almost all the animals (Many will be poor though). I'd definitely love to stay longer if I could, and linger at different exhibits to watch the antics of one species or the other.

I wish I could stay longer at zoos, but due to travel with friends, family, transport times, or other obligations soon after, I never can manage longer. Someday I need to take either a solo trip or one with those who tolerate opening to close at a zoo.

Never been to Wildlife World but that seems to be a reasonable amount of time to spend there, as it's similar to how long I spent at Wilwood Wildlife Park. I have no idea how anyone can do Shedd in less than 6 hours honestly, or how you can do many of the zoos I know you've visited in less than 5.5.

 

[Astrotom3000]

I'm very curious to know how long you would spend at Shedd Aquarium. Most ZooChatters say it's a 3 hour zoo but I've never seen it in less than 6 hours.

Shedd would be a full day for me, rope-drop to close, guaranteed. Especially since it uses standard operating hours (9-5), whereas Georgia was open 9-9. Absolutely no way am I giving the country's most species-rich facility anything less than the 8 hours its usually open.

And even though I said Greenville wasn't a full-day zoo for me; I still spent 4 hours there when most people would probably recommend 1-2.

When I visited Tierpark Berlin in 2018 it was the first time I had seen an African elephant since I was a kid, everywhere else I have been has Asians! The two species are roughly equal in the UK as well so I guess it's just weird chance.

The vast majority of my credits are in the Southeast US, where African Elephants appear to be far more common than Asians Elephants (and even the ones I visited that replaced Elephants with Rhinos were still of the African genera). I believe Bronx is the only zoo I've ever been to that holds Asian Elephants.

 

[CMP]

Never been to Wildlife World but that seems to be a reasonable amount of time to spend there, as it's similar to how long I spent at Wilwood Wildlife Park. I have no idea how anyone can do Shedd in less than 6 hours honestly, or how you can do many of the zoos I know you've visited in less than 5.5.

I am (or rather, need to be) a fast walker

Shedd would be a full day for me, rope-drop to close, guaranteed. Especially since it uses standard operating hours (9-5), whereas Georgia was open 9-9. Absolutely no way am I giving the country's most species-rich facility anything less than the 8 hours its usually open.

It is possible to see almost all the species at Shedd IMO in about 2.5 hours, although there will definitely be some misses from fish hiding in corners. Also, you probably won't have time to read too much of the signage. I'd recommend at least 4 hours for a proper first-time visit, 8 hours would be wonderful, but you'd likely see most of the species you can around the 4- or 5-hour mark.

 

[evilmonkey239]

I spent 12 straight hours in the Georgia Aquarium. Didn't see the sun for an entire day.

I collect souvenir cups at every zoo I go to; I have amassed quite a collection and use them frequently (currently enjoying some water from my VA Zoo cup). Same with magnets.

I have never seen an Asian Elephant since I went to the Bronx Zoo as a kid (and that was in the 90s). Every zoo I have been to that has elephants has African Elephants.
I spend all day at facilities that most zoochatters say take 2-4 hours. Very rarely is this not the case (Greenville, Gatorland, etc.).

Growing up going to Toledo Zoo & Aquarium, I’m a lot more used to seeing African elephants, and have seen them at 5 places compared to only 4 with Asian elephants (although interestingly, I’ve been to at least 3 more zoos with Asians, making for a total of 8, that I did not visit them at). Noteworthy is that I have only seen a bull Asian elephant at one facility, that being Hank at the Columbus Zoo & Aquarium.

 

[15399]

This talk on elephants is interesting. This was never a group of animals I associated much regional bias in which species is held with (although by and large elephants as a group are more common in certain regions than others). It does appear though looking at what zoos hold elephants in the Southeast there is a slight bias towards African elephants in that region (though certainly not of statistical significance). Zoos with Asian elephants are: Smithsonian, Miami, Busch Tampa, Little Rock, and Audubon, while zoos with African elephants are: Birmingham, Montgomery, Disney, Jacksonville, Tampa, Atlanta, Miami, and North Carolina.

Of course, what animals one sees most often is usually caused less by what's common in a region versus what is at one's specific home zoo. The state of Ohio has two holders of each elephant species, but for someone living in, say, Cleveland, they might see Africans significantly more often than Asians simply because they go to the Cleveland Zoo significantly more often than either Columbus or Cincinnati. I'm sure all of us have those few species that are technically common but that they seldom see (orangutans are one of those for me), but also species that are actually quite rare but that they see quite often because of one or two zoos they frequent.

 

[Astrotom3000]

It is possible to see almost all the species at Shedd IMO in about 2.5 hours, although there will definitely be some misses from fish hiding in corners. Also, you probably won't have time to read too much of the signage. I'd recommend at least 4 hours for a proper first-time visit, 8 hours would be wonderful, but you'd likely see most of the species you can around the 4- or 5-hour mark.

The thing is, I am the kind of person who likes revisiting and cycling through exhibits multiple times throughout the day because it gives me the best chance to catch everything that might be hiding and/or not on exhibit all the time. Plus, I do like reading so that also adds onto my time spent in each exhibit. Also, there are some exhibits where I can just sit back and watch them for minutes on end. I always maximize my time at these facilities where ever possible, so that I am not just visiting them; I am experiencing them.

Sure, I could spend just 4-5 hours at these places, but why stop there? Especially for a place as big as Shedd. I can see the Amazon Rising exhibit alone being a big time sink for me (fun fact, I spent 8 hours at the Florida Aquarium and half of that was just for Wetlands of Florida).

Zoos with Asian elephants are: Smithsonian, Miami, Busch Tampa, Little Rock, and Audubon, while zoos with African elephants are: Birmingham, Montgomery, Disney, Jacksonville, Tampa, Atlanta, Miami, and North Carolina.

This part in and of itself is interesting. While at a glance it looks like the 2 species are closely balanced, there is one major factor you didn't mention; geographic distribution.

As an NC resident, if I want to see Asian Elephants, I would have to go all the way up to DC. Barring that, I would need to go all the way to Tampa or Miami (I skipped Busch Gardens because I am not really a theme park person and I already had DAK and SeaWorld on my itinerary), and barring that, all the way to Alabama. Whereas if I wanted to see African Elephants, I can just head over to Asheboro, Atlanta, Jacksonville, or Orlando. From my starting point, all the African Elephants are concentrated throughout the region while Asian Elephants appear only on the fringes.

And I only started doing road trips on my own in the past few years, and I have prioritized closer destinations as I grew more comfortable traveling, hence why I have gotten unlucky here; the distribution of elephant holdings has favored Africans for me. Granted, DC is closer to me than Atlanta, and I haven't had a chance to plan a trip there yet, but that will change.

 

[CMP]

The thing is, I am the kind of person who likes revisiting and cycling through exhibits multiple times throughout the day because it gives me the best chance to catch everything that might be hiding and/or not on exhibit all the time. Plus, I do like reading so that also adds onto my time spent in each exhibit. Also, there are some exhibits where I can just sit back and watch them for minutes on end. I always maximize my time at these facilities where ever possible, so that I am not just visiting them; I am experiencing them.

Sure, I could spend just 4-5 hours at these places, but why stop there? Especially for a place as big as Shedd. I can see the Amazon Rising exhibit alone being a big time sink for me (fun fact, I spent 8 hours at the Florida Aquarium and half of that was just for Wetlands of Florida).

Of course, I'd love to spend time like that at Shedd. I was trying to simply mention the minimum time needed, by all means, enjoy a much longer and in-depth visit if you can!

 

[Great Argus]

This talk on elephants is interesting. This was never a group of animals I associated much regional bias in which species is held with (although by and large elephants as a group are more common in certain regions than others).

I've always seen both about equally, so they're not really a group I tend to think of as biased.

(North to South)

Point Defiance, Asian
Oregon, Asian (2x)
Wildlife Safari, African
Six Flags Discovery Kingdom, both (3x)
Oakland, African
Fresno Chaffee, Asian (2x)
San Diego Zoo Safari Park, African
San Diego Zoo, both (2x)

However, the bias has shifted significantly in favor of African since some of those visits. Six Flags no longer holds elephants at all, Fresno swapped to African, and San Diego's last Asian passed away.

As it currently stands on the Pacific Coast, from a zoo standpoint:
Asian Elephants at Point Defiance, Oregon, and LA
African Elephants at Wildlife Safari, Oakland, Fresno, SDZSP, and San Diego.
More Asian to the north (although Point Defiance's is elderly) and African more predominant to the south.